Simple OMD versus GH3.

Started Jan 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
G Sciorio
Regular MemberPosts: 294Gear list
Like?
Re: Simple OMD versus GH3. / Pleased to read this.
In reply to amtberg, Jan 25, 2013

amtberg wrote:

Aleo Veuliah wrote:

G Sciorio wrote:

I have both and agree with you. I'm glad you put it in a real-world perspective not the usual exaggerated ones I sadly often read online.

As you might know I shoot full time with the OMD for jobs but now I'll be using the GH3 for work and will have the OMD for times when I want something similar but very small. That's where I am at now but in the future I might opt for the G5 which I'm kinda obsessed with too.

Hello Sciorio,

I enjoyed much your non biased opinion, I was a pro 100% in the past, now I can say I am a 60% pro. I am very tempted to buy both the OMD and GH3, I work now with a G2 and a GF1 with 4 lenses, from 7mm to 200mm all Panasonic Lumix lenses. I am a bit conservative but a time comes when you really need to upgrade. I think the quality of the sensors on the OMD and GH3 will stay updated for about 2 years. Maybe now is the correct time to buy the cameras. I want also the 12-35mm and the 35-100mm f/2.8, it will be a considerable investment, but I hop to cover it with some pro work.

I see cameras like the G5 and OMD as our "5d" or "d700" mid range bodies but am sooooo super happy Panasonic took the plunge and made an all out pro camera that is the GH3.

I agree on that.

When you compare the GH3 to its proper 35mm frame cameras like the Nikon D4 or D1X and you can appreciate the small size of the GH3.

True, and it is more appreciated when you compare the lenses sizes.

The whole depth of field and noise level arguments are more then played out. Never had a client complain about the files my OMD delivers and I don't suspect when shooting a magazine cover with the GH3 that I'll get any push-back from clients either.

Yes now the image quality with Micro 4/3 is great, only for pros that enlarge much or use all the time high ISO a full frame will be better. But with the improvements on the good RAW converters these arguments are minimized.

What is here for me, as a working pro, is that the GH3 is a true hybrid camera. Its designed to easily acquire still, video and audio of the highest quality while still being affordable. This is a really big deal for pros as we're constantly trying to offer more services to our clients while at the same time working with shrinking budgets as publications struggle to transition online.

I'm proud to be one of the first working pros to have moved past the DSLR and into a hybrid system.:-)

And you should be, I think many have not yet changed because they have not yet realized the full potential of the Micro 4/3 system. Before I had DSLR's and I don't feel the need to change from Micro 4/3.

-- hide signature --

Giulio Sciorio
Small Camera Big Picture
http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com
Portfolio
http://www.giuliosciorio.com


-- hide signature --

Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.
God always take the simplest way.
Imagination is more important than knowledge.
God is the tangential point between zero and infinity.
Aleo Photo Site

I wonder if some pros shooting with DSLRs might be more tempted to move to MFT due to the GH3's DSLR-like appearance? Might be less self-conscious about being taken seriously?

I think so. The extra size works well for me since my fingers fall into place and overall its comfortable.

Had to add this - as far as looks yes and no:

I sell a vision and offer services to clients to purchase that vision. I'm not selling myself as a person with a camera. I'm an artist and I happen to use a camera. When I create I want the camera to be easy to use and yes fun too. I don't worry about image quality for still since I think pretty much every camera is capable of making great stills. I do want a camera that can make good video and there are only a few in the market that does it.

No other camera blends both as well as the GH3 and since offering hybrid products (blending of stills, video and audio) gives me another service to offer my customers its what I am using now.

Some photographers sell their personal image, meaning they look the part but I think that is a mistake. If you sell the idea to your customers that you are bringing big cameras then they are going to expect big cameras and to just show up one day with a OMD can spell disaster. But if a photographer sells a vision and offers services to make that vision happen then it does not matter what the photographer shoots with as they are selling a vision first.

To the photographers that are getting customers based on the idea of their personal image and big cameras using a small camera is a mistake. They would need to grow into a service based business which I think is the best thing to do in the long run.

Getting hired just because you offer a particular camera might have worked in the 80's when if you used a view camera you might be the only person in town and could charge what you want but today everyone has a DSLR so unless you show up with a Phase One having a DSLR that your client can get at a local electronics dealer could be a mistake as well. In the end selling your yourself based on what gear you have also puts you in the position of being the lowest price out of the group of people in your area that happen to shoot the same gear.

Now that cameras like the OMD and GH3 have moved passed auto and become intelligent pretty much anyone can get a good exposure and focus every time so what is left? Vision and services.

-- hide signature --

Giulio Sciorio
Small Camera Big Picture
http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com
Portfolio
http://www.giuliosciorio.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow